What Does 'Number of Cases Handled' Actually Mean? Zenkoku Shougai Nenkin Partners Clarifies Definition and Publishes on Q&A Page

Social Insurance and Labor Consultant Firm Zenkoku Shougai Nenkin Partners (Chiyoda City, Tokyo; Representative: Takeyoshi Miyazato), which has supported over 2,500 individuals specializing in disability pension applications for depression, has renewed its official website. In conjunction with this update, the firm has formalized and publicly disclosed the definition of its 'support track record (number of cases)' on its Q&A page.

When selecting a firm for disability pension application support, the number of cases handled is often used as a comparative criterion. However, the scope considered as 'track record' varies among firms, raising concerns that figures may circulate without clarity on what they include, leading to potential misunderstandings.

Through this initiative, Zenkoku Shougai Nenkin Partners aims to contribute to an information environment where users can make accurate comparisons and judgments without confusion.

Definition of 'Number of Cases Handled' at Zenkoku Shougai Nenkin Partners

The firm defines the number of cases displayed on its website as 'the number of cases in which formal support for receiving a disability pension has officially commenced.'

The cumulative track record published on the website (as of July 3, 2026) is calculated based on this standard. Cases at the consultation stage—such as free assessments, inquiries, phone consultations, and in-person consultations—are not included.

Concerns About Inconsistent Definitions Making Comparisons Difficult

On the websites of firms offering disability pension support, the number of cases handled is often presented as a factor in selecting a service provider. However, the criteria for what counts as a 'case' differ from one firm to another. While some refer only to officially initiated support cases, others may include consultation counts, inquiry counts, or support assistance cases.

The firm has received multiple inquiries expressing difficulty in making accurate comparisons: 'When looking at the number of cases handled by different firms, it's unclear what criteria are being used, making proper comparison impossible.' When definitions are unclear, decisions may be unduly influenced by the size of the numbers alone.

In light of these concerns, the firm has formalized its definition of case numbers and made it publicly available via its Q&A page.

Excerpt from the Q&A Published on the Official Website

Q: What is the basis for the 'number of cases (track record)' displayed on your website? Why aren't consultation cases included?

A: The 'number of cases' refers exclusively to cases where a formal contract for pension application support has been established (consultation cases are not included). In the field of disability pensions, the definition of 'track record' varies by firm—some include phone consultations, free consultations, or general support cases under their reported numbers. As a result, it can be difficult to understand what a given number actually represents. To ensure users can compare and evaluate service providers with confidence, we clearly define our track record as only those cases where we have formally accepted responsibility as a pension application agent. Cases involving free assessments, inquiries, or consultations are not counted. We believe that avoiding ambiguity in our metrics ensures an accurate understanding of the type and extent of support our firm has provided.

View the full Q&A page here

Three Proposals for Transparent Reporting of Case Numbers

To help create a trustworthy information environment where users can make informed decisions, Zenkoku Shougai Nenkin Partners proposes the following three guidelines for the disability pension support industry regarding the reporting of case numbers:

- Proposal 1: Clearly state the 'population base' of the reported cases

It is essential to clarify whether the number refers only to formally initiated support cases or includes consultations and inquiries. Users should be able to understand not just the size of the number, but also the criteria behind it.

- Proposal 2: Specify the 'time period' and 'as-of date' for the reported figures

Including the time frame (e.g., cumulative, annual) and the specific date of the data helps prevent misinterpretation during comparisons. Disclosing the update frequency is also recommended.

- Proposal 3: Provide notes on 'included and excluded items'

Explicitly stating what is included—such as free assessments, inquiries, phone consultations, and in-person consultations—ensures users receive a more accurate understanding of the reported figures. A simple note can significantly improve how information is perceived.

Statement from Takeyoshi Miyazato, Representative of Zenkoku Shougai Nenkin Partners

'We believe that choosing a support firm is a significant decision for individuals considering a disability pension application. That’s why it’s crucial not only to present large numbers but also to clearly communicate what those numbers are based on.

At our firm, we view clarity in defining our track record as part of our service quality. Moving forward, we will continue to provide transparent disclosures regarding our track record, scope of support, and fees.

We will continue improving the organization and dissemination of information on our website to ensure that individuals seeking disability pension support can easily access the information they need. By continuously reviewing how we present support content and disclose information, we aim to enhance clarity in reporting and provide information that enables easier comparison and evaluation.'